When Relationships are the Trigger: The Paradox of Safety and Connection in Child and Youth Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Considerations of safety have long been at the forefront of work with children and youth in out-of-home care, though the conceptualization has evolved significantly over the years. In particular, the awareness of safety as a fundamental component of relational connection and well-being for children and youth in care has informed a new paradigm for these environments. The introduction of Trauma-Informed Care (TIC) has resulted in more in-depth explorations of the meaning of safety for both young people and their carers in order to promote both organizational and individual health. Determining what safety means for individuals both within and outside of this system of care is a critical point of connection and intervention. This practice concept paper reviews the existing literature addressing safety within child and youth care and child protection environments, including conceptualizing safety and intervention approaches which emphasize the development of safety vocabularies and skills of safety planning with children and youth who have experienced harm within the context of relationships. Using the lens of child and youth care environments, the application of these concepts is considered at the level of improved practice and future opportunities for research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.024 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".